The Russia-Georgia conflict

Going nowhere fast

AS RUSSIAN tanks flattened the Georgian army in August 2008, did the two countries' diplomats discuss Russia's obligations under the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination? It sounds like an April's fool, but the International Court of Justice was in no mood for pranks when it ruled on Georgia's charges against Russia on April 1st. The Georgian government's failure to raise allegations of ethnic cleansing with Moscow directly, said the judges, meant that it had not exhausted the convention's remedies before heading to court. They dismissed the case by a ten to six majority.

This was a “very, very good decision”, said Kirill Gevorgian, a legal adviser to the Russian foreign ministry. Georgian officials were less effusive. Tina Burjaliani, a deputy justice minister, spoke of a “procedural technicality” that could be overcome. Grigol Vashadze, the foreign minister, said he was “very disappointed” at the decision, parts of which he dubbed “totally ridiculous”.

But Mr Vashadze's deputy, Nino Kalandadze, smelt victory. Georgia contends that its primary conflict is with Russia, which has supported separatism in Georgia's breakaway regions since the early 1990s. Russia, conversely, insists that the conflict is between Georgia on one hand and South Ossetia and Abkhazia on the other; its own role is simply that of a mediator. As a result, Russia's lawyers argued in court, it could not be in dispute with Georgia in this case. The judges disagreed. Russia's claim to third-party status, Ms Kalandadze insisted, is now untenable.

Legally speaking, that is probably going too far. In finding that a dispute exists under the treaty, the court did not assert that Russia was a party to the conflict. But niceties aside, few people outside Moscow take Russia's argument seriously: Hanjörg Haber, head of a European Union monitoring mission set up in Georgia after the short war, said it is “clearly absurd”.

Even so, Russia's attempt to reposition itself as honest broker is central to its strategy in the internationally mediated Geneva negotiations, which began in the aftermath of the war in 2008. With representatives from Russia, Georgia, Abkhazia, South Ossetia, the United States, the United Nations, the EU and the OSCE around the table, the talks aim at an agreement on security, stability and the return of the displaced.

In practice, Russia dominates this dysfunctional process, according to Vladimir Socor of the Jamestown Foundation, a Washington-based think-tank. South Ossetia and Abkhazia tend to defer to their Russian sponsors. Talks failed to prevent Russian vetoes from hastening the departure of OSCE and UN missions from both territories, where Russia has stationed overwhelming military forces.

One rare sign of progress concerns recent statements not to use force. Georgia's president, Mikheil Saakashvili, made a unilateral declaration to that effect at the European Parliament last November. The authorities in the two breakaway provinces followed suit. But Moscow then insisted that the three parties should put their pledges in writing, while refusing to commit itself to such an agreement. Georgia objects to the implicit legitimacy this would lend South Ossetia and Abkhazia, and instead wants a bilateral agreement with Russia. The result: stalemate.

On the ground, at least, the situation remains relatively calm, thanks to the EU monitors and a locally convened Incident Prevention and Response Mechanism (IPRM). Civilian casualties have decreased, and fears that the conflict might re-ignite soon have largely dissipated. Georgia, says Mr Vashadze, is in a much better situation than it was in December 2008.

But things remain fragile. Last week, a minor spat over the provision of public information about NATO in a school in the border village of Ergneti, which was due to host the next meeting of the IPRM, led to South Ossetians temporarily withdrawing from the mechanism altogether.

Moreover, stability has not led to diplomatic progress. Russia, reckons Mr Haber, lost its leverage over Georgia when it recognised the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. At the same time, Georgia's tendency to seek short-term diplomatic victories—over Russia's bid to join the World Trade Organisation, for example—comes at the expense of reintegrating its separatist regions. A wiser strategy, Mr Haber suggests, would see Tbilisi dealing with Abkhazia and South Ossetia separately, and gradually tempting them back into the fold.

A flawed process is probably better than none. The Geneva talks are the only place where all parties to the conflict meet. But with no side in the mood to make concessions, the status quo grows ever more entrenched. What was once a frozen conflict is in danger of freezing over again.

So what happened ? The little tyrant Shakashvili sucked up to the Merkins who sent him weapons and a bunch of testosterone-driven advisers. Short on hair, short on brains, long on slogans.
So the little tyrant imagined to be backed by a superpower and consciously attacked somebody under the protection of another superpower.
The little tyrant got hit badly by the big bear's claws and now he complains about being a fussy little furry and loveable bunny. The reality is he is a stupid wolf who attacked a bear and got half his ar§e bitten off. Rightly so. End this theater and stop propping up little dictators.

South Ossetia and Abkahzia have become backwaters.... Russia doesn't care for them, they are minor and unimportant pieces of land on the Russia diplomatic chess-board.

Russia currently lavishes attention on them only to reinforce its military power in its 'near abroad'.

Georgia should just get on with building a prosperous civil society and eventually the South Ossetians and Abkahzians will enviously look on from their squalor behind their Russian patrolled barbed wire.

I hate to say this, but I think the West should consider recognizing South Ossetia. The Georgians do have a history of steamrolling over minorities within their borders, when they should to have granted them autonomy instead. Seeing as how it came to war, I don't see how there's any way to convince Ossetians to rejoin with Georgia anyway. If the people of South Ossetia want independence, maybe we should just let them.

The EU political midgets and the US have recognized Kosovo with criminal PM and with no prospect of functioning economy and then shamelessly dare to demand from Russia to abandon help seeking Ossetia and Abkhazia in favour of a deranged lunatic in Tbilisi.

These perpetual cold war brainless policies helped to create the BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, China) alliance that cannot be ignored.

Things will start working out better in Russia, as well as around the Caucasian mountains all the way around the Caspian Sea shore once Russia gets rid of Tsar Putin the Lunatic.

As to the article's statement "South Ossetia and Abkhazia tend to defer to their Russian sponsors" - surely the trained Kremlin puppets pretending to speak for ther Putinoid republics have no option but to obey every sound emanating from their masters who have been demonstrating for well over a decade in Chechnia, Dagestan and elsewhere their skills in applying Russian Spetznaz armour supported by air power against civilian population.

Talliner writes: "Why does Kremlin not send jets to defend civilians from Gaddafi's paramilitaries?" ----- My guess is probably for the same reason US doesn't send its jets to defend civilians in Saudi Arabia/Bahrain.

WhiskyTangoFoxtrot wrote: 'The Georgians do have a history of steamrolling over minorities within their borders'

Looks like you may have been preoccupied with 'whisky and tango' when you wrote your opinion. Obviously you meant to say "The Russians do have a history of steamrolling over minorities within and outside their borders"

As to the issue of possible recognition, Tsar Putin must first release the North Ossetians, the Chechens, the Ingushetians, and all other non-Russian people who, like now independent Armenians, Georgians and Azerbeijanis, have been strugling for centuries against the guns and armour of their Russian warlords. Let them all get free and choose the shape of their statehood by their own free will.

The Georgians will have to be patient. They have a lot of homework to do first, and should move on building a better society. There is one positive outcome - Russia has much lesser leverage now over the Georgia's internal politics. The main concern and realistic goal of Georgia and sympathetic international community should be to maintain non-recognition of SO and Abkhazia as international subjects, and assure a peacefull co-existence. Nobody knows if the stalemate will convince SO and Abkhazians to switch sides, but a prosperous Georgia surely increases chances of it.

The first comment to this article was excellent. No two ways about it and regards to Call Him Rah Rah Tyrant.

I also have some views re success of the actual reforms of the S.
The real probation period for these adjustments will be after the cancellation of financing from well-known superpower...

For instance, let's imagine what would be if an ordinary policeman whose salary now is near 1 000 USD in the republic where the official average wage is around 100 USD (and I guess it is almost impossible to earn more for the most of the ordinary citizens) will not receive his/her salary in time or will receive only 200 USD.

How they (Georgian Police Dpt.)will tackle with the corruption..at the same level or not?

So, now Corporal Joey, junior US rep of the Russian Putinoid Brigade, pretends to know something about a strategy his Kremlin Commissars are pursuing regarding Gaddafi's fight with his revolutionaries. WOW, with such a 'briliant' demonstration of Joey's talents his Kremlin superiors should not delay promoting him to Corporal First Class !

Now, apart from the fact that nobody would ever take seriously Corporal Joey's claims to 'strategic' competence, he has evidently run out of his preconceived (Kremlin-sponsored) naive ideas and resolved to ignore the Economist article's topic which is about Georgia, Russia and Putin's fictional creations called South Ossetia and Abkhasia. It has nothing to do with Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, or for that matter with Nigeria, Sudan, North Korea, Mongolia, Vietnam, Colombia, or even with Joy's fictional Republic of Tim-Buck-Two...!

Zerzy writes: "I have a feeling that if only country of Georgia could pack and move far away from Russia their problems could be quickly solved." ----- I hear there is a state of Georgia in the US, might as well move there.

Omni writes: "...a prosperous Georgia..." ----- That may be a problem, since the US is cutting back on giving financial aid to Georgia. Barry is not into Georiga that much as George Dubya was.

The first comment to this article was excellent. No two ways about it and regards to Call Him Rah Rah Tyrant.

I also have some views re success of the actual reforms of the S.
The real probation period for these adjustments will be after the cancellation of financing from well-known superpower...

For instance, let's imagine what would be if an ordinary policeman whose salary now is near 1 000 USD in the republic where the official average wage is around 100 USD (and I guess it is almost impossible to earn more for the most of the ordinary citizens) will not receive his/her salary in time or will receive only 200 USD.

How they (Georgian Police Dpt.)will tackle with the corruption..at the same level or not?